Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38472416›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

A unidimensional short form of the Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS-7) derived using item response theory.

Tyrone B Pretorius, Anita Padmanabhanunni

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07120477 (Esketamine Versus Crisis Response Planning Versus Enhanced Treatment as Usual for Suicide Prevention), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07120477 phase4suspendednot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Esketamine Versus Crisis Response Planning Versus Enhanced Treatment as Usual for Suicide Prevention: A Pragmatic Randomized Trial in a Brazilian Municipality (SAVE)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Sao PauloRan2026 to 2029Enrolled468ConditionsSuicide Prevention, Ketamine, Crisis Response PlanArmsIntravenous Esketamine, Crisis Response Planning intervention (structures safety planning)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Tyrone B PretoriusDepartment of Psychology, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa. tpretorius@uwc.ac.za.
Anita PadmanabhanunniDepartment of Psychology, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

South African Medical Research Council SIR Grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS) is the most widely used measure of hopelessness, a key psychological construct linked with various mental health outcomes. In clinical settings, the BHS has proven a reliable tool for assessing hopelessness; however, there has been debate regarding the tool's internal consistency among non-clinical populations. Most studies assessing the dimensionality of the BHS have relied on the use of classical test theory (CTT). The length of the BHS has also prompted concerns over its practicality. The BHS-9 was developed to address these critiques and formulated based on psychiatrically hospitalized adult patients. The current study investigates the dimensionality of the BHS-9 among a non-clinical sample using item response theory (Mokken scale analysis and Rasch) and CTT. The results confirm that the BHS-9 is essentially unidimensional. However, a salient finding was that Item 6 violated invariant item ordering. An exploratory factor analysis of the remaining eight items found that the items accounted for 48.05% of the variance. Further exploratory factor analyses, removing one item at a time, showed that the removal of item 18 would increase variance explained > 50%. The revised BHS-7 was found to be unidimensional and maintained strong internal consistency and criterion-related validity. This revised tool effectively captures the essence of hopelessness among a non-clinical population and presents a more refined option for the assessment of this construct.

Indexed as

AffectSelf ConceptAdultFactor Analysis, StatisticalHumansPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychometricsReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID38472416
PMCPMC10933447

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.